You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The "H" in PyHAT was meant to stand for HTMX, which I still love and is great, but I don't think PyHAT should just refer to HTMX; if someone is using Django and Unpoly, or FastAPI and Turbo, I would consider them to be in the PyHAT family :)
I've been thinking about this for a bit, and I'm still uncertain.
I think there are both advantages and disadvantages to having an opinionated take on what an HDA app can look like in the Python space, but I understand the limitations of being too rigid.
In one sense, there's the "spirit" of PyHAT, which is meant to represent an embrace of the HDA paradigm within the Python space--and then there is the more "opinionated" take that embraces specific libraries like htmx and Tailwind as real drivers of the Locality of Behavior approach. Meaning, you have a declarative and explicit way of designing your application with little more than Python and HTML.
Ultimately, if we do include a "recommended" build for PyHAT, it most likely will mean htmx. But on the other hand, I don't think it's meant to be exclusionary... in the sense that if there is a "better" or at least "alternative" design in the hypermedia space that does not include htmx, then I think it makes sense to talk about it here.
Lately, I have been referencing it this way:
Python
htmx (or hypermedia)
ASGI (your mileage may vary)
Tailwind
The "H" in PyHAT was meant to stand for HTMX, which I still love and is great, but I don't think PyHAT should just refer to HTMX; if someone is using Django and Unpoly, or FastAPI and Turbo, I would consider them to be in the PyHAT family :)
Thoughts @tataraba?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: